It's one of the necessary evils of modern golf, I guess, along with power carts, laser range-finders, and 7,400-yard public courses. I speak, of course, of the now ubiquitous course rankings.
An argument can be made, and I would be hard-pressed to defend myself, that I am the last person to criticize this controversial practice. A couple of decades ago, I was the managing editor of what then was called Score Magazine (now SCOREGolf) when we published this country's first such list of the "best courses in Canada." I have to be honest. We did it because the U.S. publications did it, and we needed to sell some magazines, to get people talking about us.
Shortly after that, I joined Golf Digest's ranking panel and, for a brief time, even edited an annual publication called "Canada's Course Ranking Magazine." If these systems stink, then I'm neck-deep in the manure.
And I think they do, to be frank. SCOREGolf just released their top-100 ranking and the very same course that was No. 1 in the country in 1988 is still there 20 years later. The National in Woodbridge, Ont., has been displaced a couple of times, by St. George's in Toronto and Highlands Links on Nova Scotia's Cape Breton Island, but it remains the all-time champ. There are some questionable picks on this year's list (Crowbush Cove in P.E.I. is pretty, to be sure, but No. 8? Come on!), but I know the people at SCOREGolf are doing their damndest to make sure everything is on the up-and-up.
They, like Golf Digest and GOLF Magazine in the States, have instituted a numerical point system that allows a ranker to rate many aspects of a course down to the fraction of a number. They describe each category fully so the ranker can evaluate everything accurately. It's just that it's a near impossible task, and the question, especially in Canada, is just how many rankers get to Newfoundland or northern Alberta or Saskatchewan? How qualified are they? What about regional bias? And I know for a fact that more often than not, rankers are swayed more by aesthetics than shot values or other design considerations. If you doubt me, and you know some of the courses on SCOREGolf's list, take a look.
Having said all this, can the system be rescued? Can course ranking ever be truly objective? I highly doubt it.
Back when I published the first volume of my series of books, The Great Golf Courses of Canada, I was either astute or cowardly enough to take the stand that the courses within those covers were not the best, but merely a smorgasbord of the best. Choosing a favourite course is as subjective as selecting a spouse, I opined.
And I stand by those words, to the point that I am considering resigning from both the SCORE Golf and Golf Digest ranking panels. Just considering, you understand, because I sure enjoy the free rounds of golf that accompany the designation.